Emmet Sullivan’s Revenge: Rupert Murdoch’s Rag Calls Mike Flynn’s Actions “Tantamount to Treason”

Once upon a time, Trump loyalists were thrilled that Judge Emmet Sullivan had gotten Mike Flynn’s case after Rudolph Contreras recused. They were sure that a judge who had fearlessly taken on prosecutorial abuse in the past would find prosecutorial abuse in the sweetheart False Statements charge that General Flynn got in lieu of a Foreign Agent charge.

In the days before Flynn’s scheduled sentencing two years ago, for example, Rupert Murdoch employee Kim Strassel stated with confidence that something had concerned the judge when he asked to see the documents Flynn claimed suggested misconduct.

It’s clear that something has concerned the judge—who likely sees obvious parallels to the Stevens case. The media was predicting a quick ruling in the Flynn case. Instead, Judge Sullivan issued new orders Wednesday, demanding to see for himself the McCabe memo and the Flynn 302. He also ordered the special counsel to hand over by Friday any other documents relevant to the Flynn-FBI meeting.

Given his history with the FBI, the judge may also have some questions about the curious date on the Flynn 302—Aug. 22, 2017, seven months after the interview. Texts from Mr. Strzok and testimony from Mr. Comey both suggest the 302 was written long before then. Was the 302 edited in the interim? If so, by whom, and at whose direction? FBI officials initially testified to Congress that the agents did not think Mr. Flynn had lied.

Judges have the ability to reject plea deals and require a prosecutor to make a case at trial. The criminal-justice system isn’t only about holding defendants accountable; trials also provide oversight of investigators and their tactics. And judges are not obliged to follow prosecutors’ sentencing recommendations.

Then Sullivan got questions on those issues answered and raised more pressing questions — such as what charges Flynn avoided with his plea deal.

COURT: All right. I really don’t know the answer to this question, but given the fact that the then-President of the United States imposed sanctions against Russia for interfering with federal elections in this country, is there an opinion about the conduct of the defendant the following days that rises to the level of treasonous activity on his part?

MR. VAN GRACK: The government did not consider — I shouldn’t say — I shouldn’t say did not consider, but in terms of the evidence that the government had at the time, that was not something that we were considering in terms of charging the defendant.

THE COURT: All right. Hypothetically, could he have been charged with treason?

MR. VAN GRACK: Your Honor, I want to be careful what I represent.

THE COURT: Sure.

MR. VAN GRACK: And not having that information in front of me and because it’s such a serious question, I’m hesitant to answer it, especially because I think it’s different than asking if he could be charged under FARA or if there were other 1001 violations, for example. [my emphasis]

Those comments fed attacks from Fox News personalities in the two years that followed and Judge Sullivan became a more pointed target of employees of the News Corp empire. After he refused to immediately dismiss the prosecution against Mike Flynn, Fox personalities accused him of bias.

Sullivan earned the ire of Fox News hosts who have been arguing that Flynn’s prosecution was the canary in the coal mine of a coup against President Trump.

Former New York state judge Jeanine Pirro said Wednesday night that Sullivan should “recuse himself” from the case, adding “he should be embarrassed to put a robe on.”

“And now what he’s doing is he’s poisoning the 2020 election by trying to make it look like [Attorney General] Bill Barr,” she said. “He’s trying to destroy the whole thing so that Barr looks like the villain here.”

Sean Hannity offered an extensive broadside against Sullivan later in Fox’s prime-time programming.

“Mr. Sullivan, what part of General Flynn being ambushed and set up by [former FBI deputy director Andrew] McCabe and [former FBI director James] Comey don’t you understand?” Hannity said Wednesday night, accusing Sullivan of taking a “clearly political stand.”

He added: “You botched this from Day One, and you had a bias from Day One,” he seethed. “You reek of ignorance, you reek of political bias!”

After Neomi Rao ordered Judge Sullivan to rubber stamp Flynn’s exoneration, for example, Greg Jarrett included it in a long attack on the judge’s insistence on acting like a judge.

Again, Sullivan balked. Something was amiss. At this point, it became clear that Sullivan was not a neutral or objective jurist dedicated to following the law. He was a rogue judge with an agenda. His decisions reeked of dead fish.

[snip]

It’s anyone’s guess whether Sullivan will grudgingly admit that he was wrong — flagrantly so. After all, this is the same guy who falsely and preposterously accused Flynn of “treason” during a previous court hearing, then recanted when he realized (with prompting) that what he’d said was not just dumb, but anathema to the law governing treason.

All of this leads me to suspect that this judge’s grasp of the law is embarrassingly feeble. His ability to recognize his own disqualifying bias is shamefully absent.

In a piece declaring that “Mr. Flynn has finally received justice” earlier this month (after Mike Flynn first called for martial law), Strassel complained that Sullivan was churlish for noting that Flynn’s guilty plea, as a legal issue, remained intact.

Judge Sullivan finally, belatedly, churlishly dismissed the Flynn case as moot on Tuesday, two weeks after President Trump pardoned the former national security adviser. But the self-important Judge Sullivan couldn’t resist delivering a parting “verdict.” He issued a 43-page opinion in which he all but declared Mr. Flynn guilty of lying and perjury and the entire Justice Department corrupt.

But now the boss has weighed in. In an editorial begging Trump to accept his loss and work to save the Senate today, the NY Post describes Sidney Powell as a crazy person and Flynn’s call for martial law “tantamount to treason.”

Sidney Powell is a crazy person. Michael Flynn suggesting martial law is tantamount to treason. It is shameful.

To be clear, Flynn’s call for martial law wasn’t treason, just as secretly working for Turkey while serving as Trump’s top national security advisor wasn’t either.

But both Judge Sullivan and Rupert Murdoch appear to agree: Mike Flynn sold out this country.

image_print
112 replies
  1. Peterr says:

    I can’t decide if the $500,000 Turkey paid to get a retired General/DIA director to sell out his country is a reflection of Turkey’s strong negotiating skills or on how little they valued Flynn.

  2. Maureen A Donnelly says:

    Thanks Dr. Wheeler. Hope you are enjoying life in Ireland. Do you think we will ever learn of the depths of all these crimes against the nation on behalf of Russia? I appreciate your deep dives into all of this and for assembling your site. you have been a life buoy in these troubling times. as a hippie boomer, all this unpatriotic stuff makes me shake my head and wonder what happened to the Grand Old Party I grew up hating; it has morphed into an evil thing that serves Putin. He’s the only one winning it seems.

    • Rugger9 says:

      As long as we keep digging, we will find it. That means no “look forward, not backwards” mentality which given what DJT did in office would be unexpected.

      FWIW, if Obama had been presented with the roadkill government that DJT left behind, he would look backwards as well to fix it.

  3. skua says:

    Murdoch is trying to claw (some of) Trump’s base away so they’ll vote in Repub senators in Georgia?
    Trying to re-integrate into mainstream politics those who think COVID is a conspiracy against freedom, those who think that Trump is a great leader, those who’ve mainlined the “Deep State conspiracy”, from Murdoch’s Fox, mixed with Q?
    Putting your foot on the brakes and having the pedal go to the floor is sure to have anyone instantly re-evaluate just how fast they’re going.
    Good luck with that attempt Rupert.

    • Gerard Plourde says:

      Skua:
      Definitely all of what you posit most likely. I think that there may also be the dawning realization and attendant fear of what they’ve potentially unleashed by encouraging the tin-foil-hat-Pizzagate-Q-Anon fringe.

      • Mart says:

        Still amazes me that Trump’s first National Security dude Flynn traded Hillary kills babies and eats them in the basement of Comet Pizza stories with his son. At this point maybe no longer amazed, just disgusted with all of it.

  4. harpie says:

    It’s kind of delectable realizing just how much the GOP Establishment Swamp is really sweating the Georgia Senatorial runoff elections.

    • ThomasH says:

      I’ve been following some commentators discussing the possibility of VP Harris running the senate should the GOP candidates win in Georgia. The Majority Leader running the business of the senate is supposedly a norm and courtesy but the constitution only mentions the VP as President of the Senate. Sounds intriguing but I’m not in a position to speculate on the viability of this strategy.

      • (Not That) Bill O'Reilly says:

        The position of Senate Majority Leader is a creature of the Senate’s procedural rules, which would have to be modified by agreement of 50%+1 Senators in order to give Harris reign over the Senate. That’s not happening, because either the GOP has the votes to stop such a change, or Schumer is in charge and doesn’t need it.

          • (Not That) Bill O'Reilly says:

            Well, yes; the point is that the Vice President’s role as President of the Senate is largely ceremonial , whereas real power over day-to-day procedure resides in the Majority Leader under the Senate’s rules. To change that dynamic in such a way as would allow Harris to exercise meaningful control over Senate procedure would require a rule change, which is not going to happen.

          • timbo says:

            The Vice President has a right to the chair at any moment they appear. The Senate Majority Leader as Chair is tradition and by will of the Senate. AFAIK, the VP can assert privilege at any time from the Senate floor (unless they are acting President of the US for purposes covered under the 25th Amendment… in which case, the Senate President Temporare has precedence)…although there may be rules of procedure that cover this to which a given VP may have agreed to beforehand that might limit this ability somewhat?

            • MB says:

              Hmmm…maybe Kamala Harris could be the new reckless “norms breaker” in this regard? IOW, find out what is not strictly against the rules and press it to the maximum point of seeing what you can “get away with”

              • skua says:

                In a tied Senate previous VPs as PresOfSenate have cast many deciding votes on many occasions. (Calhoun and Adams having totaled 60 such votes between them.) KH would be following precedent if the Senate is tied.
                KH running the Senate day to day while the Repubs have a majority – that I can’t find precedent for.

    • PeterS says:

      “I never thought leopards would eat MY face,” sobs woman who voted for the Leopards Eating People’s Faces Party.

      A better tweet ^^^

  5. Inspector Clouseau says:

    This shift from the post makes me believe some of the internal polling in GA is trending in the wrong direction for the GOP and they have realized that the senate is really in play and they have a good chance at losing it. By keeping the GOP in control of the senate they can limit the scope/breadth of the investigations going forward, allowing the GOP to put some meat on the bone for those looking for a pound of flesh post-trump, without giving up the entire cow. While some of the really progressive ideas are doa in the senate, I think a few things that might seem minor could have lasting repercussions and that is what the GOP wants to prevent. The last thing they want is expanded mail in voting post pandemic, or heaven forbid; making election day a national holiday.

    • Rugger9 says:

      Not so much on the investigations, since the House is in D hands and the DOJ will be enforcing the House subpoenas instead of filing specious briefs with the courts to dodge that obligation. I expect Schiff, et al to be very interested in getting to the bottom of things here.

      McConnell’s challenge will be to not get his caucus hammered in 2022 since he has to defend ten more seats than the Ds do.

      Election Day as a holiday is something almost everyone else does in the G80, like basic medical care (i.e. Medicare for all). I’m sure on the latter topic that most business types would only be too happy to trade the Medicare tax for the employer contributions if for no other reason than cost certainty.

      • Chris.EL says:

        Will Biden’s new Treasury Secretary turn over Trump’s tax returns upon “taking office”?

        Any consensus or ideas?

        • BobCon says:

          If the House Ways and Means Committee requests them, then Treasury will follow the law. I don’t know what Ways and Means will do, though.

          • gmoke says:

            If the ineffectual (except for his donors) Richard Neal is Chair of Ways and Means expect a very, very, very slow walk on those tax returns. If he requests it at all.

            • BobCon I says:

              That is my general feeling, although he may want to get some good will on the left to preempt another primary.

              My guess is he is hoping NY state gets them first and moves a case quickly and he can act as though Ways and Means would interfere by asserting its authority.

  6. Chetnolian says:

    Rupert has a virtually unbreakable rule that he supports apparently strong leaders until they lose, then he doesn’t, quickly. The only interest Rupert has ever had throughout his career is self-interest. In that he’s like Trump only he is better at it.

    • BobCon says:

      Strassel will get more appearances on CBS and NBC Sunday morning talk shows to explain how she has always been concerned about Flynn and how badly Obama, Mueller and the Democrats fumbled their opportunities to rein him in. Peter Baker and Mara Liasson will be sitting next to her, nodding along in agreement.

  7. Ian Fromme says:

    “just as secretly working for Turkey while serving as Trump’s top national security advisor wasn’t either.”

    Flynn wasn’t charged for Treason. Treason has a high bar to prove, and would have made it a political show trial.

    We ended up going after Capone for tax charges. That did not mean Capone was innocent of everything else. Working for a foreign government, especially off the record, while simultaneously claiming to be a servant of the US government, is treason.

      • P J Evans says:

        Definitely doesn’t. I don’t think it fits the definition in law, either, and you’d have to stretch to make it espionage.

    • joel fisher says:

      Seems like a stretch to call it treason; what’s the degree of hostility/friendliness that makes what one might do for, say, Canada, OK, but not for Turkey? Better to look at his post-pardon behavior which increasingly looks to be interfering with a Congressional proceeding, namely, accurately counting the electoral votes. Cripes, General Mike “Martial Law” Flynn, you don’t even want Congress to have a 1/6/21 vote. At the end of the day these pardons aren’t going to do Trump, Flynn, and the fellas a lot of good. Why? Because they’re criminals and from where I’m sittin’, I see more recidivism than rehabilitation and that’s how criminals roll.

      • ducktree says:

        HO’s …

        Habitual offenders, the whole lot of them. They can’t help themselves, but deserve no pity.

  8. CD54 says:

    My question is whether what Flynn did for Turkey qualifies as espionage not just colloquially but legally.

    Trump pardoned a Turkish spy, no? Pollard served how many years?

    • Norskeflamthrower says:

      Does the legal definition of espionage fit within the Constitutional definition of treason, I don’t think so but then, does it matter? I mean the definition of espionage is: the act of securing information of a military or political nature that a competing country holds secret. That’s all that’s necessary in this case, is Flynn guilty of espionage?

        • Norskeflamthrower says:

          yeah you are of course correct and anyway there is no way to get either Flynn or the Dumpster on espionage either now that the pardon is down.

        • Dmbeaster says:

          Even Sullivan walked back his treason remark during the hearing, and people should stop repeating that error. He was speaking along the lines of betraying the interests of one’s country, and using the word treason to describe it. It was a mistake in rhetoric, but not on the broader subject of the seriousness of Flynn’s wrongdoing.

    • viget says:

      My question is what Flynn was supposedly paid for by Turkey was a) actually paid for by Turkey rather than using them as a pass-through cutout for other nation-state(s) and 2) actually the contractually agreed upon work in the statement of work and not something else entirely.

      • P J Evans says:

        I remember seeing it months back – it feels like last year – and it hasn’t improved with acquaintance. (Amateur artist, definitely.)

    • subtropolis says:

      Michael Cohen described being tasked with bidding up another painting of Donnie Dipshit at auction. I’ve no doubt that this one was similarly boosted by one of his minions.

    • J R in WV says:

      Looked at the “painting” linked, amazeballs~!!~

      Ho.wever, given the escaped video of Trump sitting down at the crowded desk with the (live!) eagle on a stand beside him for a commercial production, then being attacked by the giant predator and ducking faster than I would have believed if I hadn’t seen it… the eagle in the painting is preparing to tear into Trump’s head for lunch!

  9. Bay State Librul says:

    Norskeflamethrower @ 2:26PM

    Dylan would call the Flynn Affair an “event” like the JFK killing, where you need logic to understand the puzzle of deliberate deception.

    As Timothy Hampton writes, “Murder Most Foul” is about the assassination of JFK. But it is also about what constitutes an event, and about how an event takes on meaning beyond itself. At still another level, it is about the haunting of America, about the role of spirit in the national life. The title comes from Shakespeare’s Hamlet, where the ghost of old Hamlet tells his son of his death: “Murder most foul, as in the best it is” (that is, all murders are foul), but “this most foul, strange and unnatural” (because fratricide and in secret), must be avenged. So we are in the land of ghosts, of the death of the “king,” as Dylan calls Kennedy at one point.”

    • Eureka says:

      BSL (and all), did you see this last week:

      Jon Allsop: “A media scooplet from me for @CJR: Rep. @tedlieu is working on legislation aimed at reviving the Federal Writers’ Project—a 1930s New Deal program that put unemployed journalists and authors to work documenting America on the public dime. /1 [links to the below article]” [thread also links Charlie Pierce’s brief booster piece, The next Zora Neale Hurston is out there]”
      https://twitter.com/Jon_Allsop/status/1341360486772781057
      7:30 AM · Dec 22, 2020

      The enduring lessons of a New Deal writers project – Columbia Journalism Review
      https://www.cjr.org/special_report/new-deal-journalism-federal-writers-project.php

      It’s a good read (and a bit of optimism for our future).

      • Bay State Librul says:

        Thanks. I missed it and you have brought it to light.

        I was blown away this summer reading “Their Eyes Were Watching God by Zora Neale Hurston (1937).
        Her opening, a real stunner, “Ships at a distance have every man’s wish on board.”
        Hope.

    • Molly Pitcher says:

      From what I have heard about her current accommodations, she would be much wiser to stay put. My guess is there are some very rich and powerful men who would like her to not be able to testify. Ever.

      • Rugger9 says:

        Yes, indeed. Remember the DC Madam and we also have Epstein’s suicide as examples for when the powerful want silence.

          • bmaz says:

            What evidence do you have that it was not a suicide? I have seen nothing to indicate otherwise. And, no, the bought and paid for shill the family hired does not count.

            • Rugger9 says:

              I do harbor suspicions but until there is actual evidence vetted in court (because of the coroner ruling I think it would have to land there to change things) it could still be Epstein doing what was expected of him in the hope that DJT would protect his interests.

              The timing was too coincidental otherwise, but Ghislaine is a good enough alternate as long as she testifies. No doubt she is a flight risk given how she holed up for months at a friend’s house as (apparently) a fugitive.

            • Molly Pitcher says:

              You are right, I should be able to claim some evidence. It just does not pass the smell test because of the convenient interruption of the closed circuit video and the timing of the whole thing.

  10. PeterS says:

    O/T. From Gohmert’s new legal challenge to the election result:

    “Under the Twelfth Amendment, Defendant Pence alone has the exclusive authority and sole discretion to open and permit the counting of the electoral votes for a given state, and where there are competing slates of electors, or where there is objection to any single slate of electors, to determine which electors’ votes, or whether none, shall be counted”.

    In other words, can we switch from a democracy to a dictatorship please.

    • vicks says:

      Hm… my copy says
      “The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;-The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, shall be the President,”
      Even if some people don’t know that the primary purposes of establishing the electoral college was to PREVENT congress from picking our next leader, even the simplest of minds should be able to reason through that NO elected official gets the last word on his/her own election.
      Especially when they lost.

    • subtropolis says:

      Something that I’ve been wondering, but have not seen mentioned anywhere: What if Pence doesn’t show up on January 6? What does the Constitution say about Plan B should the Veep be unavailable?

      • Rugger9 says:

        Then the Pro Tem would do the honors, but I’m sure that’s one of the plans for the WH.

        It was pretty bad for Pence to vacation in Vail (trying to keep it quiet, in an indication he also understood it was a bad idea) while the relief bill was being held hostage by DJT and the vaccine rollout was having problems. After all, Pence is head of the COVID-19 response team.

        • P J Evans says:

          More like the COVID non-response team.
          (Friend just sent me a joke about ‘Operation Warp Speed’ being renamed as ‘Operation One-Quarter Impulse’.)

  11. Chetnolian says:

    That is not really OT. It is the latest piece of what the NYP is complaining about. You don’t surely think Gohmert’s efforts are not co-ordinated with the White House do you?

      • Rugger9 says:

        The Padishah Emperor for Life (h/t Charlie Pierce) will not be bound by mere rules, My pool entry is a full hour if it gets certiorari.

    • Stacey says:

      I certainly HOPE Louie Gohmert’s efforts in this are coordinated with the White House!!! If so, that’s a really GOOD sign!

      If in any battle in which you find yourself left with no better alternative than to haul out Louie Gohmert to do ANYTHING on your behalf, it’s a sure sign you have already lost the battle. You got nothin’!

      You’ve got bearded men in kilts carrying AK47s coming to DC to defend your honor and you’ve got Louie Gohmert spiffed up and ready to go. Let’s DO THIS THING!

      Popcorn anyone?

  12. Jan says:

    Said so over a year ago, and I meant it – Flynn is a traitor, in the old fashioned sense of the word.
    Thank you Marcy and all the gang here, for shining the light. Keep kicking at the darkness, your voices are invaluable. Best wishes to all for a better year ahead, and much to look forward to.

  13. Chris.EL says:

    Along the way someone remarked how Flynn managed to “fly under the radar” and wasn’t discovered to be a bad apple; didn’t Obama try to warn incoming administration?
    ~~~~~~~~
    This Stanford professor is also perturbed by the vacationing president, vice president and treasury secretary:
    “Michael McFaul Retweeted
    Michael [email protected]
    “During this holiday, I didn’t get to visit my folks in Montana like I usually do, or go golfing in Florida, or skiing in Colorado or relax at a resort home in Mexico. But I helped pay for Trump, Pence, and Mnuchin to do so. And it really pisses me off. They couldn’t wait 3 weeks?” …

    • Molly Pitcher says:

      Michael McFaul is not just a Stanford Professor, he is the former US Ambassador to Russia from 2012 to 2014.

      • Chris.EL says:

        Sorry, all info I had was simple few words on his Twitter top page — I didn’t investigate further.
        ~~~~~~~~~
        I’m forever amazed that humans can read these scripts of various languages. Used Google translate to be able to read this:
        [very sobering statistics! CALIFORNIA vs. Russia…]
        “Alena Popova
        @alyonapopova
        “California
        Population: 40 million
        Life Expectancy: 81 years
        GDP: $ 3,120 billion
        Median Base Salary: $ 5,108
        Minimum wage: $ 2 184
        Poverty line: $ 1,063

        Russia
        Population: 147 million
        Life Expectancy: 72 years
        GDP: $ 1,700 billion
        Median Base Salary: $ 575
        Minimum wage: $ 164
        Poverty line: $ 155
        11:00 PM Dec 27, 2020 Twitter Web App”

    • @pwrchip says:

      “didn’t Obama try to warn incoming administration?”
      Yes.
      “Cummings warned the Trump transition team directly in a letter on November 18, 2016—well after Flynn’s previous background investigation—that Flynn was apparently was being “paid to lobby the U.S. Government on behalf of a foreign government’s interests” for work that began in August 2016.”
      https://oversight.house.gov/news/press-releases/cummings-issues-statement-on-white-house-effort-to-blame-obama-administration

  14. Mitch Neher says:

    Excerpted from the Wikipedia entry on scent-marking:

    Males and female ring-tailed lemurs (Lemur catta) scent-mark both vertical and horizontal surfaces at the overlaps in their home ranges using their anogenital scent glands. To do this, they perform a handstand to mark vertical surfaces, grasping the highest point with their feet while applying the scent.

    [end excerpt]

    I mention this because Louis Gohmert’s lawsuit against V. P. Pence is a little like a lemur doing a handstand to rub his naughty bits against a tree trunk; except that, Gohmert is rubbing Trump’s anogenital scent glands by proxy on Pence’s pants leg.

    If that’s even possible??

    • Rugger9 says:

      To paraphrase my teenaged daughter back in the day… Eewwwwwwwww.

      To McFaul’s complaint, they did these things because the taxpayers picked up the tab, let’s also recall the many other junkets like Mnuchin’s trip to see the eclipse in KY and (IIRC) his honeymoon as well (it’s a long list). The stench of corruption in this WH is pervasive and take decades to extirpate. These are people who will spend other people’s money long before they spend their own. So, why is McFaul surprised when they do it?

      • Chris.EL says:

        was watching DVD of “Sully” when Mnuchin’s name rolled across the screen (producer role) — wait! whaaa… well, former Goldman Sachs banker, so it’s not like the guy needs to “dead head” on a flight to get around; he’s got the bucks.

  15. madwand says:

    I’m with Judge Sullivan and Rupert, Flynn sold out his country, and there ain’t a lot of distance separating those two concepts.

  16. viget says:

    OT—

    What do people make of the Bernie/McTurtle shenanigans today? I am concerned that McTurtle will tie a $2000 check bill that includes sec.230 repeal to a NDAA veto override vote. Dems cannot vote for that. As painful as it will be, they must vote no. And Bernie needs to let the NDAA veto override go forth without tying it to the $2K.

    Sec. 230 is too important. Without it, say goodbye to Twitter and independent news media on the internet. Say goodbye to this site!

    • Rugger9 says:

      I would think an attempt to merge the two bills would require some action to delay the vote (i.e. amendments) and force a conference. Note also that these bills are in different states, where NDAA is on a veto override after approval by Congress and DJT’s veto (so I’m pretty sure amendments now would not be possible) and the $2000 check bill is fresh from the House. Passage rules are different as well depending upon how the check bill is treated (i.e. regular order or accelerated).

      McConnell does not want a delay (or the vote, really for the checks) so Loeffler and Perdue can go back to campaigning in GA. The NDAA override requires 2/3 (67 Senators) which means 19 GOPers have to stand up to DJT.

      What Bernie did is to filibuster to waste legislative time and force McConnell to vote on the checks as the price to stop. In a way it is rather brilliant, like Pelosi calling DJT’s bluff on the relief amount.

    • madwand says:

      You were close, McConnell tied 230 to it and then a motion to investigate fraud (non-existent) in the last general as per McConnells buddy Trump requested. The 600 check is already signed, while it allows Trump and Republicans to blame Democrats if they won’t agree to the amendments for the 2000- they need 60 votes to pass the measure-its hard to gauge the impact on the special election in Georgia. Very clearly yesterday it was McConnell and one other Republican senator who killed any action on the vote yesterday.

      My guess it there’s significant opposition among the Republican caucus for the 2000 checks. The question is will they stand on that and sacrifice Loeffler and Purdue. I don’t see that happening, but its clear also that McConnell and Trump have been talking.

      • P J Evans says:

        They’ll claim it’s the Dems who killed it, but it’s the poison pills that McConnell had inserted that will do it.

  17. Eureka says:

    OT – really interesting interview w suspect’s former atty, who — after suspect’s former gf told cops last year about his bomb-making activities in the RV — bolstered her report to police as to suspect’s capabilities. From what the atty says, sounds like they fudged some in the “closed unfounded” police report (which is linked).

    Greg Mitchell: “Shocker (or not): Warner’s girlfriend warned police he was building bombs in his RV last year [link to video and text at Newschannel 5 Nashville]”
    https://twitter.com/GregMitch/status/1344109142395547648
    9:32 PM · Dec 29, 2020

    • Eureka says:

      Specifically, the former atty, Throckmorton, claims that the police statement that he refused to (permit his client to) allow a visual inspection of the RV is both false and makes no sense, as he was not the suspect’s attorney at the time AND he had helped complain to the police in the first place, on August 21, 2019. The information he disputes is in a statement from Metro PD summarizing events; police never made any direct contact with Warner:

      During the week of August 26, 2019, the Hazardous Devices Unit made contact with attorney Throckmorton. The recollection of that call is that Warner did not care for the police, and that Throckmorton would not allow his client to permit a visual inspection of the RV.

      https://www.newschannel5.com/news/newschannel-5-investigates/warners-girlfriend-warned-police-he-was-building-bombs-in-his-rv-last-year

      • vvv says:

        “The recollection of that call” might well indicate that there is no written record, and somebody is now stating, or claiming that someone else stated, what they remember about it.

      • Chris.EL says:

        sounds like lazy + covering up for inaction.
        ~~~~~~~~
        don’t usually view silly videos but this one is good … Jimmy Kimmel mash up (1 min. 24 sec.) Obama speaking (for ~ nine minutes) about the USA Special Forces operation targeting bin Laden versus Trump blabbering for *48 minutes* — frankly a lot of Trump’s word salad was true gibberish !! — but it really was Trump talking and that’s what he said! Can’t believe he has been the president.
        [ link ]
        https://twitter.com/i/status/1342909800569593860

      • bmaz says:

        Yeah, that didn’t make sense. As I read it, Throckmorton was actually the ex-girlfriend’s attorney, not Warners.

      • rosalind says:

        as soon as i heard it was his g.f. who called it in, became concerned this was a case of the police treating this as “the crazy ex g.f. out for revenge”, and not taking it seriously.

        • rosalind says:

          was coming back to add my prediction that there would be domestic violence involved with Warner, when i see this in the Tennessean article:

          “In an interview Tuesday night, Throckmorton told The Tennessean he urged police at the time to look into the woman’s claim. He said she feared for her safety, believing Warner may harm her.”

          • BobCon says:

            Men who have rotten attitudes toward women are wildly overrepresented among those committing mass violence in this country, And to the credit of a lot of outlets, it hasn’t gone unnoticed. The NY Times, for example, has published this account:

            https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/10/us/mass-shootings-misogyny-dayton.html

            But there is also a rotten core to the political desks covering hard right wingers which bend over backwards to avoid ascribing out and out loathing for women as a motivation. NY Times chief political editor and former theater critic Patrick Healy doesn’t believe it fits the narrative of his diner safari explanations, so you will not see it incorporated into headlines, ledes, or standard Peter Bakeresque “analysis” dumps. They will jump at providing all kinds of unfalsifiable vapor motivations for the right, but demonization of women isn’t allowed.

        • Eureka says:

          Exactly, rosalind, and it’s even sort of recreated in the account at NewsChannel 5 (~crazy suicidal gf w guns) — in contrast with the account at The Tennessean (written by a female journalist), which leads with the fact that she had the suspect’s *unloaded* guns next to her, which she wanted the (perhaps atty) or police to take away. While dude was making effing bombs in the yard (which was, in my estimation, the ‘real’ complaint.).

          In other words, this woman had a completely normal reaction to her very fucked up circumstances, and thank goodness she got help and got out and beat the averages that way, as many do not. [Can you imagine — she’s had to live with this knowledge and whatever fears specific and vague like it’s a “private matter”, and one which reflected solely on her (“crazy gf”, defrayed by whatever social capital the lawyer’s statement gave) since Warner got the blank slate treatment because they never made contact with him?]

          As a general rule (which good cops and social service professionals know well), women are usually the canaries or bellwethers in these “crazy” situations. I read the stories as they (LE) were just as happy not to deal with this guy (for similar reasons — to wit, “he doesn’t care for the police”), were OK with not getting close enough to the bear to poke it. He doesn’t answer the door (or phone, or whatever), checks out in the databases, “Oh well.”

      • Montana Voter says:

        The more likely scenario is that the attorney told the police that Warren would not agree to talk with the police and therefore they would need to get a formal search warrant. The ex-girl friend either could not or would not supply sufficient probable cause to support a warrant, so it was dropped by the police. Not a good decision in hindsight but our due process protections are daunting in light of questionable facts.

  18. skua says:

    I’m off on my rounds and may get caught up in things.
    I’ll grab mys chance to thank you all for making this sensible place where happenings can be reported and considered.

    It’s been a petty and direly medieval time lately; small kings, palace corruption, plague left to run, Goebbels enabled, strange cults, indulgences bought and sold.
    But there’s been good too; a woman VP is arriving, many voted and marched for decency, many took care of others, and [touch wood] hasn’t happened.

    It’s only numbers but it is an ending of some number. And endings and some new beginnings are needed round here.

    A Happy New Year to all of you.
    Lang may yer lum reek.

  19. Eureka says:

    Not that there is a correct page for such nonsense, but I put this on the wrong page:

    LOL at Sooners “Bizarro” and “Visage” standing next to each other in the crowd, backs to camera as Lincoln Riley spoke. I hope someone got a screencap of that.

    Back from checking the roster to make sure my reading IS fundamental, it is indeed “Bizzarro” (misspelled above) and “Visage”.

    But how bout them Gators. Too Soon? (ouch, quickly ducks)


    Haven’t found that screencap to send into that old Byron Allen et al. show, was it Real People?

  20. Spencer Dawkins says:

    Can our collective 2021 resolution be to pass a law so that whatever the heck Flynn was doing on behalf of other countries is clearly and FABulously illegal, so that we demonstrate that we learned SOMETHING from four years of explaining that whatever the heck Flynn did was not treason?

    Call it “Flynning”. I don’t care. For extra credit, make the penalty the same as treason.

    We may never have a declared war again. I can’t imagine that should excuse what Flynn did because it wasn’t happening during a declared war.

Comments are closed.